Comments

Why did NC even bother to vote for Obama, when obviously a right wing, homophobic idiot like Burr is still ahead. He wasn't even a popular senator like George Allen was. Either the minority groups and younger people don't care about the midterms, or people in NC don't understand ideologies.

Obama never pretended to be someone who he never was. In fact, Bill Clinton was way more liberal than most people expected after 1992. He had to have been sort of a blue dog to get elected in Arkansas.

Obama did campaign on healthcare, and he did campaign against ending the Iraq war. He was the first non-southern Democrat to get elected since Kennedy. If people could believe him when he was just talking the talk, it makes me angry they are turning their back on someone who has actually kept his promises.

FLAP, don't get angry. The people are not betraying President Obama. They never liked what Obama was planning to do (what he campaigned on). They just knew they didn't like what the Republicans had done. The vast majority of people don't concern themselves with platforms.

They look at results and actions. They didn't like what Republicans did for much of the 00s (wars, deficits, illegal immigration inaction, etc.) So they voted for Democrats (including Obama). Now they don't like what Democrats have done, so they will vote the other way. There really is no mystery to it. And if the Republicans don't do what the people want this time around, the Dems will get another chance, unless some third party arises to actually do what the majority of people want.

FLAP: "Obama did campaign on healthcare, and he did campaign against ending the Iraq war. He was the first non-southern Democrat to get elected since Kennedy. If people could believe him when he was just talking the talk, it makes me angry they are turning their back on someone who has actually kept his promises. "

This is not why people voted for him. They just voted for "change", meaning the non-Bush party. Now they have realized the change has been a change for the worse. They don't like repubs, but they dislike Obama even more.

NC is conservative. McCain wasn't. I'm actually kind of glad that Obama was elected now. Now the country can see what the liberals bring to the table, and now we'll get a chance to show America what real conservatism is in this next congress.

I agree with all that has been said...and I think Burr holds this seat. But it is a republican poll. And if the margin of error is added it might be closer to a 10 point race. That seems more reasonable. Anecdotally, however, my sister's bf moved here to Md. 6 months ago. Plenty of time to at least get acquainted with who's running (after all, we have a toss-up Gov. race.) He didn't vote in the primary last week because he had no idea of who was running...but he loves him some Obama.

He is 28..not even that that young. The hope and change message was powerful. But it was a cult of personality (the biggest reaason I believe the GOP has no shot in 2012.)

You are right in some respect that Obama's personality played a large role in his winning. Other are also correct in some respects that the vote was a repudiation of Bush II. But Obama was clear on what he said he would do...end Iraq, do more in Afghanistan, get the economy going, pass universal healthcare, deal with global warming, etc.

Many posters here think Obama is unpopular because he is too liberal. Baloney. Obama's ratings have suffered because of a bad economy and a mishandled year long push for healthcare reform. If the economy were creating 300,000 jobs a month Obama's rating would be sky high...he would be getting major kudos from the public for his accomplishments on healthcare, Wall Street /financial reform, education reform, ending major combat in Iraq, successful ending of the Gulf Oil Spill crisis, Nuclear Arms Treaty with Russia, etc. The public would love the Recovery Act.

But because of the slow economy and no new jobs people are angry, frustrated and scared and so his approval ratings are low though not in the tank. It has nothing to do with him being a liberal.

As for NC...this race is over because Marshall has not funds. If she did she could win this race.

Exactly right. The vast majority don't know what's liberal" or "conservative." They look at results. Add to their unhappiness the news that helth insurance premiums are going up 20% for next year, if you can get coverage! Here in Col. there is an emergency push to do something to keep the 5 companies that provide child only insurance policies from closing up shop.

Somehow it snuck up on everybody that effective this week, no insurance company can refuse to cover children with pre-existing conditions. So companies that provide insurance policies are about to go out of business - because obviously anyone who doesn't have insurance for their kids, if their kids develop a malady, will apply for and get coverage. For the children only companies, that means bankruptcy in short order. Whoops - maybe they should have read the bill before they passed it.

P.S. What the Colorado insrance commission did to address this situation is impose an emergency rule that you can only sign up for child-only insurance a couple times a year - that will delay by a few months, at least, the destruction of these companies. they hope Congress will do something about this situation by that time.

Far Left, also important to remember how Obama bought the election by outspending mccain several times over in several states. People voted for a vague idea of change. People did not vote for what obama has done. They did not vote for him to shovel government money to unions, they did not vote for him to go around the world apologizing to tyrants for America. People voted for a vague idea of hope and change after they were bombarded with obama's vague message. They have now learned they made a mistake and are attempting to fix it.

In 2008, 130 million people voted for 130 million different reasons. It's funny to see everyone try to get into the collective heads of everyone else. Vague hope and change messages are nothing new, and candidates use that language win or lose. Bob Dole '96 ran on a change platform. Obama's campaign was basically a fusion of the JFK '60 and Clinton '92 campaigns with a millennial update.

"He didn't vote in the primary last week because he had no idea of who was running...but he loves him some Obama.

He is 28..not even that that young. The hope and change message was powerful. But it was a cult of personality (the biggest reaason I believe the GOP has no shot in 2012.)"

My theory is that the more charismatic candidate always wins. Only if neither are charismatic do things get interesting, ie: Ford v. Carter, Gore vs. Bush II. Usually those are closer elections.

A couple good books have been written on the differing worldview of today's young people vs. their parents/grandparents. On economics & domestic issues, they are not that much different. But there are stark differences, we're talking differences of 50-70 points on the following issues:

Foreign policy: Young people do not approve of aggressive foreign policy. They were and are the most fervent opponents of the Iraq War. They also do not agree with statements like, America as to fight abroad to protect interests at home. I think it's b/c of the absence of the Cold War during their upbringing. To them large segments of the world are not our enemy, and they travel more than the previous generations did. If Obama loses, it will be because he lost his strongest supporters on the Afghanistan issue. The only reason he was even able to challenge Hillary was her 2002 Iraq War vote.

Trust in government: They do not fundamentally distrust government as much. Probably because the government sector has been involved in hiring a lot of them, and private companies have been doing more with less and not offering young hires benefits like health insurance. I recommend to students they not even ask about health ins benefits at job interviews and to prepare to buy it on their own.

Diversity. Growing up in a fundamentally less segregated environment has an effect. Young people are 65/35 white/minority. Older people are 80/20. Among children under 5 it's something like 55/45 or closer. That's bound to have an effect on social tolerance. Attitudes on inter-racial relationships, for example. Obama is the perfect symbol of that.

Context is everything, and you have to consider the context of young people. Growing up in the 90s/2000s...very different from the culture wars of the 60s/70s. Obama was simply easier for a lot of young people to identify with, especially when compared to McCain, who was probably singularly the WORST candidate in a generation wrt to youth. I remember my students saying "He tells stories and gets distracted like my grandpa."

Reagan acted smooth, wise, and witty. McCain acted stubborn and cranky, especially the way he condescended towards Obama at the first two debates. As if a younger person's perspective shouldn't even be listened to because he's just a young whipper snapper.

Post a comment

Name:

Email Address:

URL:

Comments: (you may use HTML tags for style)

Please be patient while your comment posts - sometimes it takes a minute or two. To check your comment, please wait 60 seconds and click your browser's refresh button. Note that comments with three or more hyperlinks will be held for approval.